Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On June 9, 2019 8:36:37 AM PDT, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I think you are mistaken that doing transactional updates in pg_index
>> is OK. If memory serves, we rely on xmin of the pg_index row for
>> purposes such as detecting whether a concurrently-created index is safe
>> to use yet.
> We could replace that with storing a 64 xid in a normal column nowadays.
Perhaps, but that's a nontrivial change that'd be prerequisite to
doing what's suggested in this thread.
regards, tom lane